Tech —

Google at the crossroads: a review of the Nexus One

We've given you some preliminary impressions of Google's new Nexus One, but …

Rumors of a Google phone have been around for years now. Even after the release of the T-Mobile G1 (HTC Dream), through the various other incarnations of Android on devices from Motorola, Samsung, Acer, and a slew of other manufacturers, there continued to be talk of how this wasn't the "real Android," that Google itself would release a final, real, "Google Phone." And so, on January 5th, the rumors finally came true with the launch of the Nexus One. The online, Google-hosted store through which the phone is sold is itself big news, but now Ars takes an in-depth look at how "super" this phone really is.

In a nutshell, the Nexus One is a best-of-breed smartphone running a modern, multitasking mobile operating system. It sports a speedy 1Ghz Snapdragon CPU from Qualcomm, 512 MB of RAM, and 512 MB of OS/Program storage. The question is, is this enough for a "no limits" device?

The Unboxing:

Unboxing the Nexus One

We can safely report that the preview models from the Google Nexus One announcement are exactly what will arrive to your door. This reviewer ordered a phone on the first day, and a box arrived the next day straight from the HTC distribution center in Texas. The box contained a smaller, very high quality box that itself held a neatly packed white box containing the phone. A comparison to the iPhone's packaging is inevitable, and yes, this was equally well packaged. No labels, no stickers on any visible side—just a plain "Nexus One" and a Google logo on the front, and colored "blue/red/green/yellow" base with the Nexus One colors. (You can find a complete set of unboxing photos, here.)

Opening the box reveals the phone itself, as the first of a series of layers. The second layer contains a neat black foam case adorned with the Android logo, an easy-to-read card containing instructions, and two small booklets with other information. The last layer contains a microUSB cable, the phone battery, a pair of headphones, and a microUSB charger. Overall, the packaging is very well done and shows careful attention to design and detail. Good job.

From here, following the instructions, I inserted the battery along with the SIM from my existing GSM phone and waited to greet this new Android.

The hardware:

The physical design of the Nexus One is excellent. The shape is comfortable to hold in the hand—no jarring edges like the Droid, no buttons that can accidentally be pushed. The phone has a power button on top, a two-part volume button on the left side, a small trackball at the bottom of the front, a 3.5mm audio jack on top, a microUSB charge and data connector at the bottom, and a slightly protruding camera with LED flash in back.

Compared to previous HTC phones and the Motorola Droid, the Nexus One deletes the camera button, which is a good call since the trackball can be used for the same purpose, and reduces the chances of accidentally activating the camera.

Palm Pre, Nexus One, and HTC G1

Compared to other phones, it is as streamlined as the Pre, thinner than the iPhone by a few hairs, and more pocketable than its Android and Windows Mobile predecessors. While not show-stoppingly gorgeous, it is a solidly built piece of kit, having no flex, no looseness. The battery cover is unnoticeable and fits very solidly. (So yes, Apple, a well-built smartphone can have replacable batteries.) My impression is that this phone was built to last.

Recharging the battery or running the phone under heavy loads, it can become warm, but not uncomfortably so. If the phone sits out in the open, the metal sides can feel cold to the touch, but they quickly warm on use. The only complaints that come to mind is that some might expect more color than the plain two-tone grey body, or the prominent Google and HTC logos on the back may be a bit too much.

The Nexus One sports a 3.7", WVGA (800x480) AMOLED screen, which has sensors that cause it auto-dim in dark situations. Different users may have different initial impressions on placing the AMOLED side-by-side with a more traditional backlit LCD screen—Ars Deputy Editor Jon Stokes found the AMOLED to be a striking improvement, but to me it first came off as dark and underwhelming. However, upon extended use, I have to say, this is better.

Before using the Nexus One, I never noticed the white cast that traditional bright backlit LCD screens have, even when completely dark. Notice how washed out the Pre and the G1 are in the comparison picture compared to the Nexus One. The Google phone's screen has none of that harsh whiteness shown by the others, and in practice it's very relaxing for extended use. The brightness gamut is excellent. In fact, it can do something LCD screens cannot: using the built-in "Clock" application, the phone has a mode that can be used in total darkness without blinding yourself. The OLED pixels are barely on, showing just enough light to render the time and various clock functions. By contrast, an almost totally dark LCD would still cast a white pallor from the backlight.

The OLED screen also has a much better viewing angle than a traditional LCD screen; this could be important for some car dock setups. Overall, I don't think I'd trade this screen for the brighter Droid screen, or any other non-OLED screen.

127 Reader Comments

Originally posted by dlouzan:After reading the first reviews, it seems the iPhone is still the gold standard in terms of usability. IMHO the best thing of Nexus One will be the community around it, I like the openness of Google about unlocking the device.

Originally posted by reflex-croft:This argument is ridiculous given that Apple must approve all apps for the iPhone. Apple is the gatekeeper on this already, but the gate isn't the OS's multitasking limitations, its their right to only allow the apps that they choose to install on the platform in the first place.

There is nothing ridiculous about it at all. The App Store approval process cannot and never will protect users against a time-bombed bit of malware from the determined criminal; you would have to be pretty idiotic to think it would. All it does is allow Apple to stop other users from being hit by that malware once it becomes known about, by permitting them to remove it from the store (the only source that people could - officially - get it from). The inability to run processes in the background is just another wall in the defence against any malware having a catastrophic effect once it was on someone's phone as opposed to a limited one for a few users. Apple's built-in kill switch is the ultimate action of last resort for those few users.

Originally posted by reflex-croft:This argument is ridiculous given that Apple must approve all apps for the iPhone. Apple is the gatekeeper on this already, but the gate isn't the OS's multitasking limitations, its their right to only allow the apps that they choose to install on the platform in the first place.

There is nothing ridiculous about it at all. The App Store approval process cannot and never will protect users against a time-bombed bit of malware from the determined criminal; you would have to be pretty idiotic to think it would. All it does is allow Apple to stop other users from being hit by that malware once it becomes known about, by permitting them to remove it from the store (the only source that people could - officially - get it from). The inability to run processes in the background is just another wall in the defence against any malware having a catastrophic effect once it was on someone's phone as opposed to a limited one for a few users. Apple's built-in kill switch is the ultimate action of last resort for those few users.

Ridiculous. I am a test engineer for a living. Its routine in any test plan to advance the date on the test device to determine if there are problems with the code at a later date. I refuse to believe that Apple does not perform standard test methodology on applications they approve for the app store.

^^ Multi-tasking on the iPhone will happen eventually. It's just a question of getting it right. Look at copy & paste -- the iPhone lacked it for a couple years and arguably it has the best mobile copy & paste out there today. I imagine Apple was waiting for A) faster mobile processors B) developing all the other features you would want if your OS is going to multi-task. For example: A good GUI to switch between applications, Expose style features, SDK considerations for how apps behave in the background, sharing data between applications, etc, etc. Apple could have certainly flipped on the switch to let third party apps multi-task but they would prefer to take the time and make sure it's done right. Palm has the right idea on the GUI side but technically their third party applications are just another HTML/JS tab so they are not directly comparable at this time. I do not care for how Windows Mobile/Android handle multi-tasking today. It's clumsy at best.

The vast majority of what can be said positively about Anroid can be said about the current crop of Winmo 6.5 devices... To bad were all wearing our fanboy hats today (did not read past first pagge of comments).

The N1 looks to be a great phone. Simple as that. Just like the iPhone though, it isn't perfect.

Backgrounding and general performance is a HUGE deal. As an iPhone user, one of the only things I truly miss about being jailbroken (I am OEM right now) is the workaround backgrounding solution (which actually is implemented quite well - very iPhone like). I am quite jealous of the N1 and the Droid in their apparent ease of apps playing well with each other while running at the same time.

That said, the iPhone is still ahead in UI. Not because of glitz, but because of consistency. The N1 (Android) is great because of it's flexibility, but that can also be a flaw if it intrudes on the actual end-user. For an example, the same finger-swipe motion in the iPhone preforms the same action from app to app. On the Android, that finger swipe (and don't get me started about the zoom in circle action) might do one of several things (this coming from about 30 minutes playing with a friends Droid)

The N900 isn't really a mobile phone. It happens to have 3G and a dialer, but Nokia has positioned it as an internet device (hence the nomenclature from the N800, N810, etc.). The fact that is can be used as a mobile is sort of like saying the iPod Touch can be used as a phone with Skype - not its primary mission.